Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Field measurements of neighborhood-scale air temperature impacts of data centers

asmedigitalcollection.asme.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 535 posts

Re: Field measurements of neighborhood-scale air temperature impacts of data centers

#391

Post by Forgeties79 »

wat10000 wrote: post #347
Forgeties79 wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not saying anything about opposition. I’m just saying I’m tired of “well people made unwanted porn before” or whatever as if the tools haven’t radially changed.

Your comment sure makes it sound like you think there's a problem with the new scale of things. And I'm not saying that's incorrect, just that it needs to be backed up with something more than "it's way bigger than it was." Completely agreed that the "this existed before" argument is tiring. But so is the "it's a lot bigger now" argument. Neither one actually says anything interesting. They're both statements of opin…

“It’s a lot bigger now” just means we have to deal with realities of scale, that’s a true statement so I’m not sure why that’s different from my scale argument. The whole point is “yes these 2 things are the same, except scale, which can make it very different.” 1 bee sting is one thing, 1000 is another. 1 piece of candy is one thing, 1000 is another.

You are assigning additional value to my comments - I get it but I’m trying to say clearly that I’m not saying those things. All I am talking about is acting as if scale is not a part of the conversation. Anything beyond that I have yet to weigh in on. i’m happy to elaborate if you want me to on any particular point, I am not being deliberately opaque here. I’m just not entirely sure what you are looking for.

Re: Field measurements of neighborhood-scale air temperature impacts of data centers

#392

Post by bigbuppo »

otterley wrote: post #217
ndriscoll wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The referenced 169 MW location is literally across the street from a residential neighborhood, where the article indicates they measured temperature differences[0]. > This gap is significant because many facilities are sited adjacent to residential neighborhoods (Fig. 1), and their air-cooled condenser arrays discharge air at temperatures 8–14 °C above ambient—often exceeding 50 °C during Phoenix summers—with air vel…

I wonder why the local government allowed it to be built without a buffer zone.

Well historically it meant that's where poor black families lived, but since these days the lower end of the 1% have more in common with the poorest of the poor than the richest of the rich it's probably where mere millionaires live.

Re: Field measurements of neighborhood-scale air temperature impacts of data centers

#393

Post by margalabargala »

whimsicalism wrote: post #386
margalabargala wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, yes, if people want something studied, grants usually are made available to study it.

i think we both know that this is not what i meant

HN guidelines are that I should choose the most generous interpretation of your comment, not the most likely one. It would be uncharitable and insulting to you to take your comment at face value.

Re: Field measurements of neighborhood-scale air temperature impacts of data centers

#394

Post by goatlover »

ericd wrote: post #93
missedthecue wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% true yet even when you solve this (for example with clean hydro in the northwest), you make zero progress with the anti-datacenter people.

Right, as with almost everything with people, it's an emotional reaction (fear) with a thin layer of rationalization on top.

This applies to the billionaire class as well. Such as having to beat China in AI race the tech CEOs started.

Re: Field measurements of neighborhood-scale air temperature impacts of data centers

#395

Post by chasd00 »

testerteert000a wrote: post #374
atleastoptimal wrote: post #25

The whole data center heat/water thing is like not even in the top 100 risks/issues related to AI, but it's all people seem to care about. Why is that?

Because "the water thing" is make or break for for the southwest, which includes LA, and LA's water system includes NorCal consequences, and California water issues include all-country impacts due to the farming there. If you haven't been paying attention to the "water thing," that doesn't mean it's not serious af.

> Because "the water thing" is make or break for for the southwest

no, it's a thing because you can put water in terms that even a hair dresser can be convinced to get scared and angry about. No technical knowledge required.

Re: Field measurements of neighborhood-scale air temperature impacts of data centers

#396

Post by Rover222 »

dwoldrich wrote: post #35

I cannot figure out if this data center panic is legit or trumped up. There are legitimate nation-state and political entities that would love to create pressure for degrowth in this area. And, pollution and natural resources are a concern, yes, fine, sure. NIMBY happens, I get it ... *BUT*, we've been building huge data centers for decades and they are minuscule compared to the size of the earth. My skeptic meter ma…

China is certainly thrilled with how this manufactured moral panic is playing out in the US. AI is going to be the most important technology in the world before long.

The water use panic is so ridiculous. The sheep pushing it do so while sipping almond milk lattes. One almond milk latte uses the same water as tens of thousands of chat gpt requests.

~80–90 liters for one typical almond milk latte vs. ~0.3–15 mL for one ChatGPT request. Using a mid-range AI figure of ~5 mL: one latte ≈ 16,000–18,000 ChatGPT requests. Using OpenAI’s ~0.32 mL figure: one latte ≈ 250,000+ requests. Even with a higher AI estimate of 50 mL: still roughly 1,600–1,800 requests per latte.

Re: Field measurements of neighborhood-scale air temperature impacts of data centers

#397

Post by whimsicalism »

margalabargala wrote: post #393
whimsicalism wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i think we both know that this is not what i meant

HN guidelines are that I should choose the most generous interpretation of your comment, not the most likely one. It would be uncharitable and insulting to you to take your comment at face value.

HN guidelines also say something about flamebait but I guess you read past that part :) cheers, obviously not going to continue replying to you

Re: Field measurements of neighborhood-scale air temperature impacts of data centers

#398

Post by fwip »

benji-york wrote: post #264
fwip wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gartner estimates that 2026 will have about $2.5 trillion in AI investments, with 2027 reaching over $3 trillion. https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2026-05-1...

Those are totals, not annual spending.

Thank you for the correction.

Re: Field measurements of neighborhood-scale air temperature impacts of data centers

#400

Post by Groxx »

duplessitous wrote: post #380
Groxx wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've been complaining that people blocking datacenters (which is partly succeeding) is worse than fixing the EPA. Something is being done, urgently (vastly faster than the larger legal system), and public outrage is loud and annoying and widely visible, which is indeed what I want. Beyond that it isn't especially fair to say "if you like to eat, why haven't you solved world hunger", particularly when those EPA/zoni…

No one has ever complained about people blocking data centers. Just over the top bad-faith to even type that out, this will be our final back and forth. My points have consistently been (1) lying is the quickest way to make an issue divisive as they focus on the lies and not the cause and that (2) that you cannot trust members of the general public to undertake radical actions nor can you sit by and egg them on to ac…

>No one can live your ideals for you, if you think something should be done, you should do it, and quickly at that. If it is that urgent, why are you not doing anything?

This is the world-hunger-equivalent bit fwiw. It's rather explicitly "if you care about this, why haven't you solved it", an over-the-top bad-faith argument.

Post reply on HN